Cargando…
Re-irradiation of recurrent head and neck carcinomas: comparison of robust intensity modulated proton therapy treatment plans with helical tomotherapy
BACKGROUND: To test the hypothesis that the therapeutic ratio of intensity-modulated photon therapy using helical tomotherapy (HT) for retreatment of head and neck carcinomas can be improved by robust intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). METHODS: Comparative dose planning with robust IMPT was...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3648492/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23601204 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-8-93 |
_version_ | 1782268855128686592 |
---|---|
author | Stuschke, Martin Kaiser, Andreas Abu-Jawad, Jehad Pöttgen, Christoph Levegrün, Sabine Farr, Jonathan |
author_facet | Stuschke, Martin Kaiser, Andreas Abu-Jawad, Jehad Pöttgen, Christoph Levegrün, Sabine Farr, Jonathan |
author_sort | Stuschke, Martin |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: To test the hypothesis that the therapeutic ratio of intensity-modulated photon therapy using helical tomotherapy (HT) for retreatment of head and neck carcinomas can be improved by robust intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). METHODS: Comparative dose planning with robust IMPT was performed for 7 patients retreated with HT. RESULTS: On average, HT yielded dose gradients steeper in a distance ≤ 7.5 mm outside the target (p<0.0001, F-test) and more conformal high dose regions down to the 50% isodose than IMPT. Both methods proved comparably robust against set-up errors of up to 2 mm, and normal tissue exposure was satisfactory. The mean body dose was smaller with IMPT. CONCLUSIONS: IMPT was found not to be uniformly superior to HT and the steeper average dose fall-off around the target volume is an argument pro HT under the methodological implementations used. However, looking at single organs at risk, the normal tissue sparing of IMPT can surpass tomotherapy for an individual patient. Therefore, comparative dose planning is recommended, if both methods are available. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3648492 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-36484922013-05-09 Re-irradiation of recurrent head and neck carcinomas: comparison of robust intensity modulated proton therapy treatment plans with helical tomotherapy Stuschke, Martin Kaiser, Andreas Abu-Jawad, Jehad Pöttgen, Christoph Levegrün, Sabine Farr, Jonathan Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: To test the hypothesis that the therapeutic ratio of intensity-modulated photon therapy using helical tomotherapy (HT) for retreatment of head and neck carcinomas can be improved by robust intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). METHODS: Comparative dose planning with robust IMPT was performed for 7 patients retreated with HT. RESULTS: On average, HT yielded dose gradients steeper in a distance ≤ 7.5 mm outside the target (p<0.0001, F-test) and more conformal high dose regions down to the 50% isodose than IMPT. Both methods proved comparably robust against set-up errors of up to 2 mm, and normal tissue exposure was satisfactory. The mean body dose was smaller with IMPT. CONCLUSIONS: IMPT was found not to be uniformly superior to HT and the steeper average dose fall-off around the target volume is an argument pro HT under the methodological implementations used. However, looking at single organs at risk, the normal tissue sparing of IMPT can surpass tomotherapy for an individual patient. Therefore, comparative dose planning is recommended, if both methods are available. BioMed Central 2013-04-20 /pmc/articles/PMC3648492/ /pubmed/23601204 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-8-93 Text en Copyright © 2013 Stuschke et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Stuschke, Martin Kaiser, Andreas Abu-Jawad, Jehad Pöttgen, Christoph Levegrün, Sabine Farr, Jonathan Re-irradiation of recurrent head and neck carcinomas: comparison of robust intensity modulated proton therapy treatment plans with helical tomotherapy |
title | Re-irradiation of recurrent head and neck carcinomas: comparison of robust intensity modulated proton therapy treatment plans with helical tomotherapy |
title_full | Re-irradiation of recurrent head and neck carcinomas: comparison of robust intensity modulated proton therapy treatment plans with helical tomotherapy |
title_fullStr | Re-irradiation of recurrent head and neck carcinomas: comparison of robust intensity modulated proton therapy treatment plans with helical tomotherapy |
title_full_unstemmed | Re-irradiation of recurrent head and neck carcinomas: comparison of robust intensity modulated proton therapy treatment plans with helical tomotherapy |
title_short | Re-irradiation of recurrent head and neck carcinomas: comparison of robust intensity modulated proton therapy treatment plans with helical tomotherapy |
title_sort | re-irradiation of recurrent head and neck carcinomas: comparison of robust intensity modulated proton therapy treatment plans with helical tomotherapy |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3648492/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23601204 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-8-93 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT stuschkemartin reirradiationofrecurrentheadandneckcarcinomascomparisonofrobustintensitymodulatedprotontherapytreatmentplanswithhelicaltomotherapy AT kaiserandreas reirradiationofrecurrentheadandneckcarcinomascomparisonofrobustintensitymodulatedprotontherapytreatmentplanswithhelicaltomotherapy AT abujawadjehad reirradiationofrecurrentheadandneckcarcinomascomparisonofrobustintensitymodulatedprotontherapytreatmentplanswithhelicaltomotherapy AT pottgenchristoph reirradiationofrecurrentheadandneckcarcinomascomparisonofrobustintensitymodulatedprotontherapytreatmentplanswithhelicaltomotherapy AT levegrunsabine reirradiationofrecurrentheadandneckcarcinomascomparisonofrobustintensitymodulatedprotontherapytreatmentplanswithhelicaltomotherapy AT farrjonathan reirradiationofrecurrentheadandneckcarcinomascomparisonofrobustintensitymodulatedprotontherapytreatmentplanswithhelicaltomotherapy |